initplus

http.ListenAndServe is implemented under the hood with a new goroutine per incoming connection. You don't have to explicitly use goroutines here, it's the default behaviour.

Will be an underlying safety issue in some system library, but they have only seen "in the wild" exploits targeting Intel. "Defence in depth" - better to push the bugfix to all than to scrutinize ARM security features to understand if an exploit is possible there as well.

It's not just that there are few signals to prevent the wrong person being put in charge, but this kind of government bureaucratic actively selects for the wrong person. These kinds of government IT projects are often soul sucking to work on, and so they attract a specific kind of applicant.

I mean they aren't designed for rack mounting? It's a consumer product, likely <0.1% of units produced will end up in a rack.

The port on the bottom is really the least offensive element of the design. I know people find it fun to clown on, but if any of them had ever used one for 5 minutes they would realize it's a terrible mouse for a bunch of other more important reasons (weight, feet quality, tracking accuracy, polling rate etc.).

Regulatory challenge is that the FDA have to combine 3 related but seperate concepts:

1. Manufacturing quality/ingredients accuracy (is the product what is says on the tin) 2. Safety 3. Efficacy

Medicines must pass all three, supplements don't have to meet any.

Given that experience, think about what state the alternatives must be in!

You'll likely run into frustrating app availability issues. Releasing iPhone apps on iPad is not universally done. (looking at you WhatsApp)

Court isn't the place for scientific inquiry into these issues. It's just not setup for it. French courts have also found in favor of "electrosensitivity" issues.

Sounds like a really interesting problem space. I'm curious if you have any comments about how you approached dealing with inconsistencies between information sources? System A says X, system B says Y. I suppose best approach is again just to bail out to manual resolution?

One example is that instead of adding support for edge case mutations/changes late in a process, it's sometimes better to force those records to be thrown away and reset with a new record from the start of the process. You avoid chasing down flow on effects of late unexpected changes in different parts of the application.

To give a contrived/trivial example, imagine a TLS handshake. Rather than building support to allow hosts to retry with a different cert, it's better to fail the connection and let the client start from scratch. Same principle can be applied to more complex process automation tasks in business. Imagine a leave tracking system. It might be better to not support changing dates of an existing leave application, and instead supporting cancel & re-apply. Best part is that the user facing part of both versions can be exactly the same.

It's not "until sales shows up", it's until regulators start causing problems for Cloudflare because you are using Cloudflare infra to host a grey market online gambling website.

Harder to justify contributing back when the open source project is so tightly coupled to your biggest for profit competitor.

Even grosser is that they explicitly limited the iOS version of Google Photos to refuse to work with scoped access. So on iOS the app will refuse to work without being granted whole library access, a permission that Google no longer allows to any third party photo app on Android. Blatantly anticompetitive.